In College, Working Hard to Learn High School Material - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/education/24winerip.html?_r=1&ref=education <comment><USER2> I work as an undergraduate teaching assistant in a sophomore physics course, and I've done tutoring for high school "advanced placement" physics classes before. In each case I observe the same problems: students can't do simple algebra, don't understand concepts like dimensional analysis (make sure that when you try to find an energy, it has units of energy), and don't actively seek help when they're struggling.

I've had AP students (high school seniors!) write things like this:

7x - 4 = 10, therefore 3x = 10.

It took a moment for it to sink in that 7x - 4 is not the same as 3x.

Students don't grasp the basic concepts, and nobody takes the time to catch them up, impeding their ability to learn until they catch up and develop a better understanding. Unfortunately the second step often never happens.

This is why I'm excited about methods like the Khan Academy's exercise system, where you're encouraged to stay on a concept until you truly understand it. I'm interested to see if they can pull it off successfully, and if it'll be put to good use. Education certainly needs all the help it can get.

I wonder what a physics major and hobby programmer like myself can do to help.

<comment><USER3> Hobby programmers are making a big difference right now, helping out Khan Academy by contributing exercises.

The whole thing is open source: <http://github.com/khan/khan-exercises>

We've had people who claim to have never been professional programmers come in and create impressive exercises that thousands of students are using daily to fill gaps in algebra, trig, calculus, etc.

<comment><USER2> Sweet. Does the Khan Academy plan to incorporate interactive simulations into its curriculum? I'd imagine they'd be very valuable in fields like physics, where concepts aren't particularly transparent unless you get to play with them for a while.

Here's a couple examples of the sort of thing I mean. Along with another physicist, we've made a complete special relativity simulator (still rather beta, though -- UI needs improvement, and the demos don't have much explanation):

[http://schroedingers- hat.github.com/jsphys/relativity/relati...](http://schroedingers- hat.github.com/jsphys/relativity/relativity.html)

There's some premade demos, and the goal is to make it embeddable so it can be used along with a video or text to illustrate a point. I've also done a bit of an interactive tutorial on wave interference, where you can play with waves to see the result:

[http://schroedingers- hat.github.com/jsphys/waves/wave_summat...](http://schroedingers- hat.github.com/jsphys/waves/wave_summation.html)

Eventually I'd like to finish off these simulations and use them to teach, as part of a complete curriculum. There's been some past efforts (with Java applets, for instance), but nothing integrated into a curriculum. Someday...

<comment><USER3> Yes yes yes. We're:

A) taking small steps every day to make our exercises more and more interactive (see @jpulgarin's link below)

B) thinking about longer-term projects, simulations, whatever you want to call 'em.

We welcome anybody to step in and blow the doors off our current exercise framework with a full-fledged simulation of some sort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have a book coming out at the end of the week that starts from 2+2 and goes all the way up to calculus and linear algebra. My private tutoring experience leads me to believe, that there is a market for "math explained simply" material for adults.

Do you guys think there is a market for printed textbooks?

I hope to earn a living from selling print-on-demand copies at lulu dot com. When people ask me "what is your startup" and I tell them that it is a math and physics textbook they laugh at me, but I think it is actually a pretty good business idea.

Am-I on brain crack?

Oh I forgot to say -- the book is really kicks ass and targeted to low- attention-span youth. I do a coherent rendition of high school math in 90 pages, calculus in 60 pages, mechanics in 50 pages, etc. The page format is half-of-letter. email me if you want to see.

<comment><USER5> Why would a low attention span youth buy a math textbook? And is it for adults or youth? Will people of all levels like it?

I once thought about buying a math text, as I noticed my Math skills were atrophying. Nothing seemed excellent, in terms of being aimed directly at adults wanting to learn math for no particular purpose.

But khan academy is excellent for that purpose.

Your book could sell, but you'd need to be clear in who it's for and how they'll benefit. Book marketing is a whole other Challenge, even if your book is good and does meet an unfilled need. An meeting a need isn't easy.

As the other commenter said, there are math books to be had by the hundred. There are free math exercises online. Most people don't care, and are busy.

Start by testing/marketing your book with students. Have them write reviews. Find out what they seem to like about it, an try to work that into your message if it's a need you hadn't considered. Good luck.

<comment><USER6> Serious question: is watching Khan Academy really learning, or is it just the illusion of learning? After watching the Algebra lectures, can you say "I learned Algebra" (meaning I spent time in a process that could be called learning) or can you say "I _learned_ Algebra" (meaning you now actually understand Algebra and can use it in your daily work)?

I am really trying to understand, because my brain seems to be wired differently than the modern generation. I find it harder to learn from videos than from books (although most books are too verbose, too).

<comment><USER7> Isn't that the same as asking is someone really learned something by just reading a book? Do you know how many programming language books I've read and can't program a lick in the language? Too many to count.

Learning is an active process no matter which medium is doing the delivery (book, video, in person, etc.) You need to work problems, do examples, prove things, and review to really learn something.

<comment><USER6> True, but watching videos can be done entirely in passive mode. It is also very clumsy to flick forward and backward to rewatch a fact you didn't catch the first time you watched it.

Actually come to think of it, that might be really interesting data the Khan Academy is sitting on: how often people try to rewatch a part of the video. Could be an indicator if they are really learning, or pseudo learning. Or maybe it is only me who sometimes needs to rewatch parts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is precisely why there's so much increasing reliance on college experience as a necessary credential for so many jobs, even office work. A high school diploma is no longer a guarantee that someone has basic literacy skills or understands basic algebra.

<comment><USER9> Was it ever?

<comment><USER10> [http://fathersforlife.org/education/happy_days_decline_educa...](http://fathersforlife.org/education/happy_days_decline_education.htm)

<comment><USER9> I read that essay. I don't believe it, or rather, I think it exaggerates what it meant to study a field. I'll base my view on what "1st year calculus" means. (Do note that my high school in Miami offered matrix algebra and differential equations, so I see "1st year calculus" as being a bit basic for what a high school might offer.)

I know that in the 1800s few schools taught the calculus we now call "calculus." Back then that term was used for many fields of math, including logic ("the propositional calculus"). Nowadays it's almost only applied to differential and integral calculus. The rigorous foundations of calculus were only laid starting in the mid-1800s, so I seriously doubt that any "backwoods" student would have been doing anything remotely like ε/δ proofs then; that being the basis for our modern understanding of calculus. It might also have been that "1st year calculus" is what we now call "pre-calculus."

That's not saying it's impossible. Here's an example book on calculus from De Morgan in the early 1800s: [http://books.google.com/books?id=zA4TAQAAMAAJ&ots=iIzsbl...](http://books.google.com/books?id=zA4TAQAAMAAJ&ots=iIzsblNu3F&dq=calculus&lr&pg=PA38#v=onepage&q&f=false) . This is from a book series meant for adults/non-researchers interested in learning more about the latest science. You can see it has a more geometric approach. I find fascinating the footnote remarking the lack of consensus on how to use the integral sign. The comment on page 52 is telling:

        There is then in this method neither the rigor of geometry, nor that approach to truth, which, in the method of Leibnitz, may be carried to any extent we please, short of absolute correctness. We would therefore recommend to the student not to regard any proposition derived from this method as true on that account; for falsehoods, as well as truths, may be derived from it.

This is quite simply because in 1836 they didn't know how to handle infinities correctly. No modern calculus book would have that phrase, because we do.

But let's suppose his father did study differential and integral calculus. That would make him the exception, and not indicative of the average. For evidence: <http://pballew.net/mathbooks> describes math education in the US and mentions that in 1871 for the University of Nebraska in Lincoln:

        "It was early accepted that mathematics, in particular calculus, would not be a required study for all students. In the first University Catalog it is noted that "Surgery and Calculus are not required of students in the Classical course." Exemptions from other mathematics were soon included."

I also read in "The calculus for engineers and physicists" Griffin 1897 this line "...methods of cheating the student into using the Calculus without his knowing that he is doing so..." which tells me that calculus wasn't that common in 1897 either.

I could apply the same questions to what "geology" means. Here's a textbook from the latter part of the 1800s. It goes into detail about all sorts of different rocks, where they are found how they are use commercially, and so on. It describes land forms. But what of geological processes? Nothing - because we hadn't figured it out yet! It says that folded strata probably come from cooling of the earth's "heated nucleus." In the section "Drift or Boulder Period" it notes what we now say is evidence of the Ice Age, but which then was a curious unknown "produced by Icebergs, Glaciers, or both." They didn't know if it was ice covering the surface, or if the land submerged and icebergs came.

They certainly didn't know about continental drift.

So the geology of the 1800s would have been quite different from the "earth science" I learned in school.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I earned my A.S. at Portland Community College before going on to a larger university for my B.S. and PhD.

PCC had a large high-school completion program which they tried to steer many entering students towards, along with all the corresponding remedial classes; these served the dual functions of providing an alternative to traditional high school and remedial education for people who supposedly graduated high school. PCC took the very sensible step of providing a placement test when you first enrolled to find out what level of classes you should start with; you could place anywhere from "need 3 years of remedial classes" to "skip the first year or so of english and math".

In my case, I lucked out and got a good advisor, who confirmed what I'd found from the handbooks: rather than spend 3 years earning a high-school diploma (graduating at the same time I _would_ have received one in standard K-12), I could spend 2 years earning an A.S. and enter PSU as a junior. I chose the latter. :)

</comment><comment><USER12> What did the NYT expect? When you gut the public school system (Florida is just a mess) of funds what did everyone think was gonna happen?

In Florida, the most important thing to teachers (and the school boards) is students passing the FCAT (state wide tests). The more in your district who pass the more funds you protect. It's no longer about teaching kids a good education. It's a ridiculous reward system to protect your job.

Most public schools have cut out "unnecessary" courses like; music, band, art, history (except American history - only teach what is needed to pass. You looking for an in-depth discussion of the civil war? Not gonna happen), advanced math (hell even basic math in some schools), the sciences, drama, english lit, etc, etc.

It's shameful down here. And I think it's a major factor in our "class divide".

You want your kids to get a good education, you send them to private school. If you can afford it.

<comment><USER13> You don't need to spend a lot for kids to learn the basics. Public school budgets in the US need to be gutted, they are way too bloated as it is.

The issue today is that the federal government in the US has made it a priority that every kid go to college, including the ones in the lower half of the bell curve. That's a recipe for diluting the value of a college degree, which historically only the top quartile of students would receive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> _"Passing the Regents don't mean nothing," Ms. Thomas said._

Indeed it don't.

<comment><USER15> Indeed; it doesn't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have been in the workforce for several years now and I find that I need to constantly be refreshing my math. A big chunk of math reeduction came when I moved from doing web development to doing games development, and I find that now that I am in the field, it seems to be sticking with me.

I think that one of the big missing things in math education is the application. I can remember all of the stuff that I learned when using a compass and a straight edge, but when I came out of private school, and went to a public school, and started learning out of books, nothing stuck.

</comment><comment><USER17> Hmm, i guess the point is to inspire HN'ers to think about systematically improving public education (or at least volunteer as a tutor).

<comment><USER11> Personally, I found that community college did a far better job at teaching the material; I suspect that in large part this occurred because the classes fit into a degree program with prerequisites. People would start at the community college, find out that the first-year college classes they needed had prerequisites of material they didn't understand, and go back to the right starting point.

We could do worse than to just send all high-school students to a community college, or programs structured like them.

<comment><USER18> _Personally, I found that community college did a far better job at teaching the material; I suspect that in large part this occurred because the classes fit into a degree program with prerequisites._

Compared to universities, you're probably right. Most big universities reward faculty and grad students based on research, not on teaching. So faculty and grad students optimize what they're rewarded for, on average. (I made this point in an essay I wrote for students called "How Universities Work:" [http://jseliger.com/2010/09/26/how-universities-work-or- what...](http://jseliger.com/2010/09/26/how-universities-work-or-what-i- wish-i%e2%80%99d-known-freshman-year-a-guide-to-american-university-life-for- the-uninitiated/) ). If you want to get better teachers or instructors, the universities have to start rewarding staff for that. If they don't, they get what we have now: universities optimized mostly for research with an incidental sideline in teaching.

It doesn't help, too, that a lot of students aren't in universities for learning—they're in to party or hang out or burn time or whatever. But that's another subject: [http://jseliger.com/2011/10/07/student-choice-employment- ski...](http://jseliger.com/2011/10/07/student-choice-employment-skills-and- grade-inflation/) .

<comment><USER19> I would generally agree that historically universities have not been as focused on teaching as research, but I believe there might be a shift in this. Many top-tier engineering schools, such as Purdue, have engineering education departments (<https://engineering.purdue.edu/ENE/AboutUs/>) looking into the pedagogy of technical education.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> an important question to ask is, what about the students who now have a high school diploma who otherwise would not have one, and are not going to attend college? I bet they are better off, and, unfortunately, are likely a large portion, if not the majority, of high school graduates in that region.

I agree there is a problem here, but am afraid it is not as simple as "durr, their high school is too easy." There are kids in those schools who will _need_ that diploma; of course, making things easier will devalue the diploma in the long run, so making things easy is no solution, but you can't entirely fault them for focusing hard on getting the students to pass exams. It's more like a symptom of larger system we live in, where having that diploma is simply far, far better than not having it. (whether it carries any real meaning or not)

</comment><comment><USER21> So 13.9% of community college students get a degree in 3 years. To me that says the system is trying to fit square pegs into round holes. Everyone doesn't need to have a college degree. Everyone needs advanced training but that doesn't always mean college. High schools should return to offering vocational training as well as academic paths.

</comment><comment><USER22> _"A few years ago, we noticed the numbers really jump," said John Mogulescu, the senior university dean for CUNY._

Thank you "No Child Left Behind"?</comment>


Kosmix Goes Horizontal - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/25/kosmix-goes-horizontal/ <comment><USER2> Looks intriguing. The more I explore this, the more I'm appreciating it. On a cursory survey, this may appear simple to do, but once you get past the initial reaction, you begin to realize how difficult and complex it is to do something like this.

</comment><comment><USER3> interesting! looks like a lot of potential. -Praaal</comment>


10 Golden Lessons From Steve Jobs - <AUTHOR> http://ririanproject.com/2007/04/20/10-golden-lessons-from-steve-jobs/ <comment><USER2> Irony: Quoting, "Don't be trapped by dogma - which is living with the results of other people's thinking," in article about being more like Steve Jobs.</comment>


Ask HN: Abuse of my Google apps email - <AUTHOR>

Recently I am started seeing eamils landing in my inbox for various signup confirmations for various services  which I don't have any idea about.
Looks like some spammer using firstname.lastname@example.com to signup for services and the signup confirmation emails landing on my catch all google apps admin account email.
Should I be worried about this abuse? <comment><USER2> As a precaution you should enable MFA for you account and change your password. I would be worried about that someone gained access and is now using the email address to sign up for services etc. If the account was compromised you could also loose your domain quickly if this is the account email for your registration provider and the use it to gain access and transfer the domain.

<comment><AUTHOR> I already have MFA. Looks like you didn't get my question. How are we going to prevent anyone from using your email id in a signup form for some service? Spammers/abuser don't have access to my email account they just use my email id. What seems to be happening is some spammers creating fake accounts for services using randomName@myappsdomain.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Building a Static Website Generator in Ruby - <AUTHOR> http://gregorywieber.com/making_of.html <comment><USER2> This is pretty cool. Any thoughts on packaging this and putting it up on Github for others to play with?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! Yes, I'd be happy to post this on Github.</comment></comment>


In Cramped and Costly Bay Area, Cries to Build, Baby, Build - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/business/economy/san-francisco-housing-tech-boom-sf-barf.html <comment><USER2> The Times selected as an "NYTimes Pick" a comment from someone in Berlin who absolutely makes my blood boil.

(S)he starts off by stating privilege as a 5th-generation San Franciscan (obviously, the kind who DESERVE to live in the city), and who fled in the tech boom of the 90s. The usual rant about whitewashing and yuppies and artists being pushed out ensues. Of course they don't want more housing built, because then dirty artists from other places would move in -- you need to preserve the history of San Francisco's starving artists, and never let new culture of any kind in.

Except (s)he says, okay, maybe some "affordable" housing should be built. No discussion on the endless problems of how to manage the waiting list for this "bucket" of housing, or what happens when those people become too successful.

And, in the end, (s)he has moved to Berlin, a city almost TWICE as dense as San Francisco. No doubt some NIMBY in Berlin at some point whined about building more housing for these "outsiders", but I'm sure (s)he does not have the critical thinking necessary to recognize that such a special flower could be the same force in Berlin that (s)he whines about happening to San Francisco.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, the comment section on that article is pretty sad. The number of people whose argument against building more housing is a fear that it will make the city "ugly" is astounding. It's mind-numbingly selfish and greedy to think that a family should barely be able to make ends meet, and children should spend less time with their long-commuting parents, just so that SF can meet your personal aesthetic sensibilities. Look, I love architecture and design, and I love beautiful cities, and I would love to remake all of North America according to my personal taste. But I'm not so entitled as to think that my occaisional aesthetic pleasure is more important than someone else's basic livelihood. Also, not to mention, the whole argument that density has to be ugly and "unliveable" is utterly ridiculous and false - there are lots of dense cities that are widely considered beautiful - Paris and Barcelona come to mind.

/rant

As the article says, it's easy to get worked up about this stuff. I suspect the "but it will be ugly" commenters are actually well-intentioned.

<comment><USER4> There are two things that continually surprise me about life in the modern, Internet-enabled age... two things that I would never have dreamed would happen, if you'd asked the 1996 version of me what American life would be like in 2016.

One is our increasing indulgence in irrationality, to the extent that we almost celebrate it. I would never have guessed that hard-right social conservatism would still be a dominant force in American politics, much less a booming business. So I got that wrong, and I'm willing to admit that happened because I didn't take the time to understand those who thought differently from myself, or how their social motivations, family backgrounds, and economic pressures are different from my own. So, my bad.

The other is the continuing notion that it's somehow desirable, much less necessary, to cram everyone into a few high-density cities on either coast. From a 1990s perspective, it appeared that the growing availability of fast Internet connections and the rise of online social, technical, and business networking resources was finally going to liberate us from crowded, noisy, polluted urban prisons with endless traffic jams, out-of-control taxes, and multi-kilobuck rents.

It should have become both possible and _desirable_ to do anything from anywhere, from the middle of flyover territory to the north coast of Alaska to the freaking International Space Station. Instead, we just get more of the same complaints. Rent is too damn high, there's too much traffic, and man, San Francisco/Seattle/Austin/New York used to be _cool_ until all these techies/hippies/yuppies/homeless people/Republicans showed up and ruined it.

I'm not willing to concede that my worldview is wrong about this. This time, it's everyone else who's being stupid and needs to get a clue.

Just _leave_.

<comment><USER5> You're not wrong. Any developer for example that can find remote work can benefit from the plummeting real estate costs to be found in any of the areas that have seen an outflow of people in search of work in urban areas.

There are countless communities across the US that are aging, as the youth have moved to the metropolis to work. Anyone that can extract money from the internet can benefit from this trend.

Couple that with low interest rates, good credit and a duplex and you can live without paying a cent for housing. This works well in towns with some sort of natural beauty, but few jobs. Grab those tourist dollars via airbnb rentals and take it easy.

<comment><USER6> What cities or towns would you put at the top of this list?

<comment><USER5> Southeastern CT is cheap, and well located, in my opinion.

You can buy a house in walking distance to the decent downtown of Westerly, RI for 120,000 and hop on an Amtrak train and be in Manhattan in 3 hours.

And if you like sailing, there are some great harbors here, like Mystic.

There are plenty of places to adventure to, Block Island, Nantucket, Martha's Vinyard, Cape Cod.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I say this as a conservative: Building limits are systemically classist and racist. They maintain a geographical segregation system.

If you want to fix the country then remove all limits, let developers develop whatever and whereever they deem there is demand. Remove occupancy laws where they're not about safety. Remove property line setbacks. End parking requirements. End requirements about private kitchens and bathrooms. Outlaw Zoning entirely.

The nation will become more equitable economically when rich people and poor people all share the same zipcodes again. And you can do it with capitalism, you can do it by removing government instead of creating it, you can do it with freedom.

Side bonus: you'll have an economic boom. Construction is an industry that creates real wealth that usually stays in the country.

<comment><USER8> _If you want to fix the country then remove all limits, let developers develop whatever and whereever they deem there is demand._

That's a bad idea, too. For example, in Fremont right now, there's a development that was built without being placed in a school district. So the students who will live there have no real school.

Also, there are serious environmental impacts that need to be considered every time you build a new housing unit.

Outlawing zoning _completely_ is a bad idea too: you'll end up with housing units built next to noisy factories or smelly plants, and then the people in the new houses will complain to get the factory shut down, even though the factory was there before they were, and it was making noise when they moved in.

Furthermore, when you build new housing, you need to consider how those people are going to get transportation, water and electricity (and heating in most places). You can't just throw up a housing unit anywhere and expect those things to be built magically.

<comment><USER9> > That's a bad idea, too. For example, in Fremont right now, there's a > development that was built without being placed in a school district. So the > students who will live there have no real school.

Perhaps abolishing the whole idea of school districts and assigning kids to schools via address as opposed to parental decision. The whole pay for schools via property tax and local levies has a pretty big negative impact on students from low income neighborhoods. Its classism baked into the system. Backpack tuitions would right a lot of wrongs in the education of our children.

<comment><USER8> A school district is a system of assigning kids to schools via address. In California, the schools are funded equally based on property tax collected at the state level. Schools are funded based on how many students are sitting in class, not on where they are located.

<comment><USER9> > A school district is a system of assigning kids to schools via address.

I think I'm aware of this, and it is often not what the parent's want used as a determinate. If someone says they have moved somewhere to get their kids in a "good" school district then the system has failed.

> In California, the schools are funded equally based on property tax > collected at the state level. Schools are funded based on how many students > are sitting in class, not on where they are located.

Except for districts where local property tax portion exceeds the funding formula levels since the property tax is kept local to the district. Also, CA schools are funded on more than property taxes such as having an income tax share.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What has happened in SF, NYC, London, is that the high cost of housing is caused by market inefficiencies as pointed out by a number of economists (eg, Edward Glaeser, Paul Krugman, Tim Harford) called "rent seeking" where politics is used to artificially limit supply (in this case through zoning restrictions) to create artificial scarcity. This is true of NYCs 13,000 limit on Taxi medallions which caused them to have a market value of $1.2 million until Uber came along and provided alternatives (the values have dropped to about $700k).

The "rent seeking" is a regressive tax which transfers wealth to billionaire real-estate developers like Donald Trump from the middle class and the poor. It also harms the economy as a whole since more income is going towards rent and housing mortgages less income is going towards goods and services. It also artificially limits construction so there are few fewer construction jobs than there would be if the market inefficiencies were removed.

Edward Glaeser is author of "Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier, and Happier"

Tim Harford is author of "The Undercover Economist, Revised and Updated Edition: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor - and Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!"

<comment><USER11> The construction bit seems silly. Everyone lives somewhere, so construction industry is just more active in exurbs and building more roads. Skyscrapers are very expensive per unit, they are only a bargain where land is expensive

<comment><USER10> Many people are living with roommates because of the high cost of housing or they are living in smaller apartments than they otherwise would. Removing the politically caused scarcity in land use would ensure more construction as these people would move into new apartments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> When I moved to the Bay area from France, I was very surprised by the complete lack of organized government at the regional level. Decisions, planning an budgeting seem to happen either at the San Francisco level, or at the California level. That is a huge gap! The result is that nothing ever seems to get done at the scale of the bay, and SF is left to deal with a problem bigger than one city. The fact that SF seems to get blamed for everything, without any visible cooperation with Palo Alto, Mountain View or Cupertino, is absurd.

Contrast this with France which, for all its flaws, has an intermediate level of government called "region" with actual decision-making power and budgets. The result is an exceptionally good transportation infrastructure and overall decent housing situation in the "greater Paris" region, which has 3x the population density of SF and a much larger population than the bay overall.

If the city of Paris alone were left to deal with the challenges of a fast- growing population hub, then there would be no counter-balance to the natural inter-city politics and they too would have a non-existent transportation network and an embarrassing lack of adequate housing.

<comment><USER13> I think this is a big reason why Los Angeles does (when compared to the Bay Area) an adequate job at delivering public transit-- unified governance over the entire city allows for this, as opposed to the power than any mid- peninsula city has to stop the advance of subway lines.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> These articles always pit "newcomers" like Sonja Trauss (2012, originally from Philadelphia) against "long-time residents" like Jennifer Fieber (1990 from wherever).

What about my generation: Kids born in San Francisco, who are growing up in a city where either we stay with our parents indefinitely, we move into tech, or we move out of the area. In terms of the economy, we are newcomers, but in terms of community, we're losing our friends and family. We need more room so we can move out of our parents' houses.

So, when I see people like Fieber campaigning against more housing, I find it quite upsetting. This is the past stealing from the future.

<comment><USER15> YEP! +1 SF has 11,000 "newcomers" per year that come here by being born here. Some of my most active volunteers are in just the situation you're describing - frustrated by the stress on their families caused by the kids either having to stay at home or move far away.

The councilman from Mountain View who was instrumental in getting the 8000 new homes approved down there was anti-growth his whole life, until a couple years ago when both of his children, both in their 20s, were still living with him. It was a revelation for him. heh.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The audio clip from the Lafayette city manager smears BARF by implying the group is trying to destroy the Bay Area's wilderness.

In actuality, the efforts over there involve a large area of land that Lafayette wants to use for a single-family-housing development, whereas BARF believes that state law requires it to be used for apartment buildings.

Also, if you want to preserve the region's wilderness, the last thing you want to do is obstruct housing density in the urban center. That just pushes people to sprawl outward into the surrounding countryside.

</comment><comment><USER17> SV is becoming a real estate business instead of tech. When you have 50% or more of salaries spent on rent or mortgage then so much of the revenue generated is just lost into real estate instead of innovation growth, investment and R&D.

I don't understand why FB, Apple, Google, etc. do not lobby hard the local cities and push to build 100,000 new units. It'll bring the rent or house prices down and it will allow many new startups to afford local hires or bring developers over here.

<comment><USER18> They've tried before and it hardly ever works.

I remember reading an article a few years ago about google trying to build 1000+ housing units in mountain view and the town shut them down as they didn't want the town to become controlled by Googlers.

Edit: @joe_the_user posted a link about facebook trying to

<comment><USER19> There are currently plans to build over 10,000 units in North Bayshore (the area around Google's campus):

[http://www.mv-voice.com/news/2016/03/03/council-oks-plans- fo...](http://www.mv-voice.com/news/2016/03/03/council-oks-plans-for-dense- housing-in-north-bayshore)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Article doesn't mention that none of the developers are trying to raze down beautiful Victorian houses to build skyscrapers. Most of SF, West of Van Ness avenue, remains untouched, even the super ugly single family houses in Richmond and Sunset. All the development is happening in Eastern Neighborhoods; SOMA, Mission Bay and Central Waterfront.

A very small percentage of the construction overall that's happening in the Mission district and Potrero hill is creating all this anti development noise. Even in these neighborhoods developers just want to build housing in underutilized land..

like this laundromat: [http://sf.curbed.com/2014/5/23/10095908/38-housing- units-pro...](http://sf.curbed.com/2014/5/23/10095908/38-housing-units- proposed-for-mission-street-laundromat)

or a graffiti lined warehouse: [http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real- estate/201...](http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real- estate/2015/06/mission-housing-development-to-replace-moratorium.html#g1)

</comment><comment><USER21> Twenty year SF resident here, and property owner. I am consistently amazed at how selfish a lot of people here are. They'll talk about how pro-housing they are, until someone bulldozes a teardown home on their street and _gasp_ builds infill development.

I am one of the last single family homes on my street, and as much as I would like it to remain a quaint little street, it needs denser development, so I've never complained about the condos going up. My property rights end at my property line (simple concept but one that confounds weak minds who can't be bothered to read the fine print when they bought their place).

<comment><USER22> _My property rights end at my property line (simple concept but one that confounds weak minds who can 't be bothered to read the fine print when they bought their place)._

Zoning is a bit more complex than that. And isn't simply about "property rights."

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The problem is that the Bay Area has too much money. Period, end of story. You can't fix things by going unregulated.

Douglas Rushkoff talks about how Internet companies these days are extractive, and Facebook is the prime example of this. (I'm not demonizing Facebook in any way, I respect the hell out of them.) The nature of how they make money is that they have users from around the world, and all their money essentially flows from those countries of origin into Menlo Park. It's extractive, and there's more money flowing into Menlo Park than would have normally occurred without a global economy. The same goes with Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, etc. There's an inordinate amount of money flowing into the Valley because of this globally extractive nature of the Internet and that's the problem.

So now, Facebook et al can afford to hire very good engineers. Friends of mine with 8-10 years of experience are making $180-200k with 15% bonus and $350,000 in RSUs over 4 years. That figure is unbelievable. Over 4 years they are making over $1,300,000 each. And they are good but run-of-the-mill engineers that passed the interview. I'm assuming all the engineers at places like Netflix, LinkedIn, Salesforce, Google, etc are all making equivalent amounts of money, or more.

How can anyone in a "normal" job compete against this? My kids' daycare teachers make $40-50,000/yr. Two Facebook engineers make more money than the entire daycare that my children go to. Of course there is going to be rampant inflation across the board when there is so much money circulating in this area. Things like Uber can thrive because it's cheap relative to time.

So, deregulation is not the answer because it will just be exploited by the rich. Do you really think that rampant building across the

The only answer is for companies like Facebook to distribute their workforce back around the US or around the world. Having Silicon Valley being the money capital of the world is causing this problem, just like it does for Wall Street. Facebook, Google, etc, need to move their workforce around, with real equal development centers in the MidWest, in the South, on the East Coast, in Europe, Africa, Asia. This will distribute the money and cause income inequality to abate here.

This is the only answer. You can't stop it with deregulation, or even regulation, because the money won't stop flowing.

<comment><USER24> So do you feel like Saudia Arabia is extracting money from the West? And while we worry about being dependent on foreign energy sources, should they be worried about foreign money sources?

Google and Facebook succeed in part because they attract the best engineers. Those people aren't going to move to the midwest or wherever just because it's "better" for the economy.

It's called trade.

<comment><USER23> Look at the inordinate amount of wealth built up in Saudi Arabia along with its massive income inequality and then you tell me.

<comment><USER24> One may as well pass a law banning high tide.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hi guys, it's me, Sonja Trauss, AMA.

<comment><USER14> One of your volunteers got me involved with the Balboa Reservoir CAC, so I've been going to those meetings, except when they reschedule it to Wednesday evening (I already have something scheduled for Wednesday evening, why do they keep rescheduling transportation to Wednesday evening, I wanted to hear the presentation), and I wonder, do you see benefit in having heavy BARF representation in so few meetings?

A bunch showed up for a meeting early last year, and then disappeared until February, when the committee published the revision to lower the maximum allowed density. For the rest of the year, local anti-housing residents complained about those invaders from Oakland (such provincialism!) without much counter-point. And a contingent from the Mission keeps pushing to associate random Spanish words with unrealistic economic policies. ("I come from Poder, and I believe in 100% affordable housing!")

It seems that small community meetings have outsized political influence, but I have a busy life. I like my job, I volunteer to tutor kids in math and science in the evening, and sometimes I cook and clean. How can I increase my influence in community politics?

<comment><USER15> Oh this is great.

Yeah the Balboa CAC meetings are particularly frustrating. The answer is yes - there is benefit to SFBARF representation at the Res meetings. It's not obvious, but on the CAC there are pro building people, and having supportive people commenting helps them argue that housing at the reservoir is something people want. I know it helps because I got calls and emails asking me to encourage people to go when we hadn't been there for a while. If our presence didn't matter, no one would have complained when we weren't there. :D

However much you can go is good. When you're there introduce yourself to the CAC members, and chat them up. Definitely testify whenever you get a chance. Especially trade information with whichever CAC members seem the most pro- building and let them know they should get in touch with you for particularly important meetings or if they need a letter written.

For spring - vote for the pro-housing slate, that's easy at least www.sfyimby.org/slate/

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> With the secular urbanization trend created by the consolidation of jobs in the city for work, contrarians that can work remotely have an incredible opportunity for easy living.

I've given up on living in major metro areas and the rat race it entails.

I tried it in a few different cities, and it was fun in my 20's. But now at 31, I want to semi-retire, do some remote consulting and work on my ideas.

There are a lot of places that let you do this, Southeastern Connecticut is one. You don't need much money at all, and it's very doable for competent developers.

Get a good deal on a multi-family house, let the tenant(s) pay all your housing costs.

Find some remote work. Find someone with a sailboat that needs to sell quick, get a deal. Spend the summer on the water. Keep a small nut, stay free.

Take Amtrak to NYC, or Boston, get hotel rooms for short trips or find someone that will cut a deal for a room mate that only wants to come in a few weekends a month for all your city excitement needs.

Make some friends in Providence and take the short drive on 95 to play disk golf with them or go to concerts.

You can rent a million+ waterfront home for the fall, winter and spring for < $1,000 a month here.

I had always wanted to take a startup all the way to a big exit for the FU money I thought I needed to be free. It turns out you don't even really needs millions to live life on your own terms if you do it in the right place.

If you do it right you can spend 1.5-2x Thailand/Vietnam digital nomad costs in quiet, scenic, pockets of the Northeast Megalopolis.

<comment><USER25> i know of people doing this in vermont and oregon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Anyone else in SF notice rents have either stabilized or gone down a bit?

<comment><USER27> They have indeed, decent 1 bed in downtown is ~2800 now instead of 3000+ a year ago

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> SF just needs to get 60,000 people to move out to get back to 2000.

One possibility is to take over Colma, the city of cemeteries. Living population 1,792, area 1.9 square miles. South San Francisco could take more apartments. South San Francisco has an abandoned railyard, a demolished ballpark, and a large dump.

</comment><comment><USER29> [http://www.sfbarf.org](http://www.sfbarf.org) ← The organization mentioned in the article. You can apparently sign up for ~4x/year email from them. Seems like a no-brainer for concerned locals.

</comment><comment><USER30> In March 2016, there was a slowing of job growth (increase of only 1300, vs. 8700 in February). Jobs actually decreased in the "San Francisco Area", but grew in South Bay and East Bay:

[http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_29771531/bay-area- job...](http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_29771531/bay-area-job-gains- slow-sharply-but-south)

Nice summary graphic: [http://www.mercurynews.com/portlet/article/html/imageDisplay...](http://www.mercurynews.com/portlet/article/html/imageDisplay.jsp?contentItemRelationshipId=7489112)

</comment><comment><USER31> Serious question: why does everyone have to live in San Francisco? There are lots and lots of cheaper places to live and work, but it seems there is something that only San Francisco can do that everywhere else can't. Why aren't city planners working on creating that special "whateveritis" in their city as fast as possible?

I don't want any pat answers like "the people are there" or "the jobs are there" because that's basically a tautology saying "everybody is there because everybody is there".

<comment><USER32> It's not a tautology. As an employee, taking a job somewhere that is not a tech hub means that when it's time for the next job, you probably have to move. Moving cross country with the frequency that SV engineers hop between startups is a horrible way to live.

If, as an employer, you move somewhere that is not a tech hub, people who can get what they need from San Francisco won't follow you.

You could in principle have a tech hub somewhere else, but there's a major synchronization problem there, and more pressingly anywhere you put a large number of high income earners is going to see rents rise sharply, at least in the short term, and people who live there don't want that. So it's not necessarily going to be any better than SF.

<comment><USER33> >There's a major synchronization problem

I think the "having to move for your next job" makes sense, but what is this major synchronization problem you are talking about? Could you expand upon this?

<comment><USER32> The major SV/SF tech companies and employees aren't all going to decide to move to Omaha on the same day. For a new city to become a tech hub, some people have to take the risk of living in a non-tech-hub city for a few years while it becomes one (and if it doesn't, well, sucks for them).

<comment><USER33> Sounds like you meant something closer to "equilibrating" instead of synchronizing, at least that makes more sense for me as a scientist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with the residences of a city saying "this city is done". I'm not saying that I agree with SF being "done". It's not all that different from arguing with a manager asking when some complex IT system is going to be "done". My answer is always the same - it will never be done until you pull the plug on it. But back to cities like SF. Who other than the people who live there should be able to say it's done in terms of new development? I certainly don't want to give a vote to anyone who benefits from development (unless they live in the city, and in that case their vote should count no more or less than anybody else).

There is plenty of good greenfield and brownfield space in the USA. Developers and people that want cheaper housing have places to go. There are so many great medium and large sized cities. There are places that may very well be the next SF. If I were a young adult, I'd be collaborating with other like- minded young adults to do some urban homesteading. But do your homework. And decide if what you are trying to do is get in on the ground floor of the "next happening thing" or just find a place that you like just the way it is. Rarely if ever can you have both. Go to local planning meetings to verify that others mostly share you point of view. And later when other claim NIMBYism, call them out on it and say "we came here because we like the way it is and want to keep it that way". That is neither elitist nor racist. The consensus may change - that is democracy. If the place you are changes into something you don't like then just go look for a new place. Change can be a good thing. It clears away the cobwebs and detritus of being in one place too long.

Clearly this "5th-generation San Franciscan" thing carries no weight. One's dead ancestors don't get to vote.

</comment><comment><USER35> There are so many nice places to live in the US, why is remote work not more prevalent? Yes, it's nice to meet face to face, but there are many jobs where remote is perfectly possible and saves a lot of resources. Also it's a lot more fun if you only meet face to face occasionally.

</comment><comment><USER36> 12,000 people moved to San Francisco in 2014. How many new units of housing were built? Almost 4,000!

What housing crisis? [https://medium.com/@TomPJacobs/what-housing- crisis-3c0568a5d...](https://medium.com/@TomPJacobs/what-housing- crisis-3c0568a5dd44)

<comment><USER16> Actually, 64,000 people moved to San Francisco in 2014.

7,000 moved into the 4,000 new housing units that were built.

5,000 crowded in with existing residents.

52,000 displaced 52,000 existing residents.

Source: [http://www.sfexaminer.com/exposing-special-interests-room- ba...](http://www.sfexaminer.com/exposing-special-interests-room-ballot-box/)

<comment><USER37> No. You're reading that incorrectly.

That article says that 64k people were born or moved here, and that 63k moved out or died, for a net population gain of 1k.

(EDIT: I misattributed this. That's Aaron Peskin's reading of the ACS numbers, which appear to be low. The actual ACS numbers suggest that the net gain has been around 12k per year since 2010. Still nowhere near a 64k net gain per year.)

SF has grown by about 45k (edit: 60k) residents since 2010 -- which, by the way, is about 70% faster than average growth rates since the 1980s. No city can handle that level of hypergrowth without problems.

[http://sf.curbed.com/2015/2/4/9995388/sfs-population-is- grow...](http://sf.curbed.com/2015/2/4/9995388/sfs-population-is-growing-way- faster-than-its-housing-stock)

<comment><USER16> _> That article says that 64k people were born or moved here, and that 63k moved out or died, for a net population gain of 1k._

No, it really doesn't. Could you quote the part of the article that leads you to that conclusion?

Here's the quote from the article that leads me to a different conclusion (that population growth was ten times higher): "In order to make room for the 52,000 people who come here each year that aren't accommodated by new building or by crowding, 52,000 current residents have to leave [and] about 12,000 of those new people become a net addition to our city"

Here's another: "The population estimate for San Francisco in 2014 is 852,537. The estimate for 2015 is 864,816. This represents a population increase of 12,279"

 _> No city can handle [9,000 new people per year] without problems._

Certainly not insurmountable problems; Manhattan went from 942,292 people in 1870 to 1,164,673 in 1880.

San Francisco went from 506,676 in 1920 to 634,394 in 1930.

Shanghai did this: [http://apps.chicagotribune.com/news/chicago-architecture- in-...](http://apps.chicagotribune.com/news/chicago-architecture-in- china/img/grfc-shanghai.png)

What kind of problems are you referring to, and are they really worse than the horrific housing and displacement problems they would solve?

<comment><USER37> I was wrong about the 1k net -- that's the article's quote from Aaron Peskin, which I read as their summary. But your original comment ("64,000 in 2014") is still way off:

 _"This official census data [the American Community Survey] shows a one-year in-migration of 63,991 people, with an out-migration of 62,757 residents — a net population increase of 1,234."_

That's the article's quote from Peskin. The article contends he's wrong, and that the net migration, per year since 2010, is ~10k.

The actual census website [1] says that SF had a population of 805k in 2010, and estimates that it will be 865k by 2015. So ~12k per year, net. Peskin's numbers look low, but your original claim ("64,000 in 2014") is wrong by a factor of >500%.

 _" Certainly not insurmountable problems; Manhattan went from 942,292 people in 1870 to 1,164,673 in 1880."_

If you think that Manhattan was a magical wonderland between 1870 and 1880, I suggest you pick up a history book. It was a brutal time for poor people in that city. [2]

[1] [http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/06075](http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045214/06075) [2] [http://www.livingcityarchive.org/htm/decades/1870.htm](http://www.livingcityarchive.org/htm/decades/1870.htm)

<comment><USER16> _> Peskin's numbers look low, but your original claim ("64,000 in 2014") is wrong by a factor of >500%._

You misread my comment. I never claimed a net gain of 64,000 people. I said that 64,000 people moved in in 2014, 52,000 moved out, for a net gain of 12,000 people. This is exactly in line with your census numbers.

<comment><USER37> You said that 64,000 people moved in (incorrect; some were born) and that 52,000 were "displaced" (also incorrect).

Every large city has a flux of people moving in and out, constantly. What matters is the net change. You can't simply take the top-line number, subtract housing, and conclude that everyone else was "displaced".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I guess I think they should keep things as they are and let the prices keep going up. Sure people will be displaced. Ohhh well. The free market can sort this out. Companies have to go set up shop somewhere else to get their needs met and likely for cheaper. Prices will come down in San Francisco and some other city who is more willing to accommodate the tech industry will arise. I think Austin Texas or Portland or LA or Atlanta would be happy to accommodate the tech industry.

</comment><comment><USER39> I can't tell you how many people I know making very good money in tech and finance living in rent-controlled units paying ridiculously low rents in SF.

<comment><USER40> What's an example ridiculously low rent?

<comment><USER41> $900 per month for a one bedroom unit, with parking, in the Mission.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Why is the bay area important? In the software industry, in theory, where you are should be irrelevant as long as you have decent internet. Why not just choose a city that has the requirements your business needs and set up there. One example I can think of is Id deciding to set up Austin.

<comment><USER43> It will happen more when the current cycle of tech enters maturity. Right now shareholders just want Growth! and don't care about profits. Once the big companies enter maturity, they will be forced to cut costs, and salaries will come down, real estate costs will be scrutinized so offices will be spread around the world.

It happens in every industry, it is nothing new and will happen in tech.

<comment><USER44> Agreed. As someone who owns san francisco/sv companies via my s&p 500 fund, I'm disappointed that their boards aren't considering their fiduciary duty to contain real estate and salary costs.

After all, what percentage of the highly paid tech workers come from elsewhere in the US? Is there really a justification for them to all be present physically in san francisco other than to swell the egos of their bosses?

</comment></comment></comment><comment> old-gregg I suspect that building more will not make a dent because everyone (at least everyone here in HN comments) assumes that more construction is the solution with _everything else_ staying the same. But it won't.

More housing will bring more people. SF is one of the most desirable places in the world to live, with striving economy, great climate, liberal culture and breathtaking scenery. Half of Americans want to live in SF, and probably billions world wide.

Building insane amount of additional housing units in SF, say 4,000,000, will result in Bay Area economy expanding even further, more companies will be created and the existing ones will probably grow faster. SF will completely eclipse NYC as the economic powerhouse and we'll have 5MM people living in skyscrapers with 1br apartments going for the same $4K/mo as they are now: see Hong Kong.

<comment><USER45> There's a lot more space in the Bay Area. If we truly put our minds to it, we could expand from Novato to Gilroy, from Pacifica to Contra Costa.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> If you live in SF and want to do something about the housing crisis, vote with us on May 10th: [http://www.sfyimby.org/](http://www.sfyimby.org/)

</comment><comment><USER47> Would reduced housing costs put downward pressure on salaries? Or could some combination of growth/competition keep them where they are?

</comment><comment><USER28> Move YCombinator out of Silicon Valley and the SF housing problem will go away. Too many startups in too small an area.

Livermore, perhaps.

</comment><comment><USER48> "We really need everything right now"

I support more building but I can't agree with the above. Straus's statement is the embodiment of the kind of short term thinking that inevitably leads to planning disasters.

</comment><comment><USER49> What a long, sparse on content article.

</comment><comment><USER50> Why can't people just move out? Take 1000 people/families and go start your own min SF elsewhere.

<comment><USER11> Because there's demand for labor in SF.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> The solution is terminally simple:

_All_ new development must include 10% to 20% of units to low income people.

Everywhere. SF. NYC. LA. etc. The end.

<comment> guard-of-terra How would those low income people be determined? Lottery? First come first serve?

I think that this solution in actually employed in Russia, and it kind of works in half-assed way, but does not produce any miracles.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Database guide for app developers? - <AUTHOR> A seasonal writer here. I'm trying to find out what developers look for while selecting a database for a native app? By database, I meant local as well as server-side.
What are the challenges, or features that you look for. For instance: Offline sync feature Read/write speed Data types Security
And so on.
I couldn't find any relevant guide for developers, so I'm researching to write one. <comment><USER2> I decided years ago (2001) to not use a SQL database for a web based document creation/management app I was making.

My reasons had to do with document integrity and database complexity. The short of it is I found SQL to be an awful approach to store and manage documents. Instead I used a simple flat file database for each user.

Another important reason I didn't use SQL after reviewing it is that I felt that designing, implementing, and securing a SQL database that could handle the aspects of document creation and management and user management required a dedicated professional who's made that a career choice and I couldn't learn all that was necessary and create the app too. It would take years to become that proficient with SQL alone.

Two years ago I finally moved over to a NoSQL database, specifically CouchDB/PouchDB, because those offer Offline data storage, sync features, Read/write speed, and Security.

CouchDB is designed specifically for Documents and addresses all the issues I found with using SQL databases for document management, and it's built specifically for use with web apps. From the CouchDB docs:

"it embraces the natural idea of evolving, self-contained documents as the very core of its data model" ([http://docs.couchdb.org/en/2.1.1/intro/why.html#a-better- fit...](http://docs.couchdb.org/en/2.1.1/intro/why.html#a-better-fit-for- common-applications))

For your paper, I would start by looking into available database options to see what they say their products are best at doing.

My experience is that SQL users tend to avoid NoSQL because it requires a very different way of doing things that they feel they can do just fine with SQL. They're probably right, but for those just starting to learn about databases NoSQL may be the best choice.

Since I never got in the SQL boat my first look at CouchDB left me feeling like they designed and built exactly what I needed and moving over to it was incredibly easy for me.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm not sure I understand your question, I'll try to answer it anyway ;-)

I'm a desktop developer. Either the DB comes from one of our supplier (we have Oracle, Sql Server and MySQL) or I'm building an application from scratch and I'll choose Postgres.

I standardized on Postgres more than 10 years ago because it was free and at the time it felt better built than MySQL.

I never encountered a use case where NoSQL would have been a rational choice (take this with a grain of salt since I don't have to scale).</comment>


1125899906842624 - <AUTHOR> http://www.rileyjshaw.com/2048/

<comment><USER2> When I read the title, I dreaded opening the link, half expecting it to be another 2048 clone with a ridiculous target! And boy was I right! :(

</comment><comment><USER3> The target number is 2^50, and the grid is 64x64, so I think this should be fairly easy to beat if you ignore the fact that it'll take about ten million years at one move per second.

</comment><comment><USER4> The font is out of place when you reach 128..</comment>


Why is America more tolerant of inequality than many rich countries? - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2017/12/capital-question <comment><USER2> Since the assumption is that one ought to be rewarded in proportion to the work one does, how does the accepted inequality-ratio compare to the distribution of work-done ? Given that there's an upper-limit on the daily information-processing capacity of an individual imposed by thermodynamics and 24 hours.</comment>


Advice for new YC founders - <AUTHOR> http://mattmaroon.com/?p=319

<comment><USER2> Hmm, maybe it is a cult after all.

<comment><USER3> Come on in and drink the Goya.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Thanks for the interesting info, Matt. adf471587879rzq

<comment><USER5> Haha, that's very interesting. What else are you doing with that query string?

<comment><USER3> Might I suggest Google for finding out?

<comment><USER5> Hence the word "else."</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Film download prices 'to be determined by screen size' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27223622 <comment><AUTHOR> Interestingly, the article suggests by size they are literally referring to physical screen size rather than resolution. Surely this would going to lead to people spoofing retina screen phones to watch on their monitors/tv's.</comment>


As Colleges Make Courses Available Free Online, Others Cash In - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/education/31iht-riedopen.html?ref=technology

<comment><USER2> It's a brilliant anti-competitive move.

If you can get the course work from MIT/Cambridge etc for free why bother going to BLAH-state to learn the stuff?

If you are going to school for the shiny bit of paper then the only bit of paper that is worthwhile will be the one from MIT/Cambridge etc, if nobody goes to BLAH state to learn stuff why would you employ someone who went to BSU for the certificate.

The same thing happened in the UK, the sector was opened up to allow pretty much anyone with a classroom to call themselves a university. This was heartily endorsed by the elite universities in the name of fairness and wider access. The result is that where there used to be good, medium and OK colleges there are now elite and 'the rest'.

So guess what employers look for on a certificate?</comment>


T-shirts are currency - patrick-james http://blog.vivekhaldar.com/post/19222915731/t-shirts-are-currency <comment><USER2> "T-shirts are underwear"

-My father, who was born in 1941, didn't like me dressing in just a t-shirt.

I'm only 24, so maybe there was a skipped generation of influence and otherwise I'd be wearing t-shirts too. But I don't like to wear t-shirts, except under collared shirts or on extremely warm days or while gardening, etc.

I feel much more confident, professional, suave, etc when I'm wearing a collared shirt. I love a watch poking out, I love rolled up sleeves.

And yet I'd _still_ be behooved into doing something for a t-shirt. I can't explain it.

<comment><USER3> "And yet I'd still be behooved into doing something for a t-shirt. I can't explain it."

I finished the Stripe Web CTF for a t-shirt. Felt extremely compelled to continue until I achieved t-shirt-vana...

<comment><USER4> Male-geek version of "she who dies with most shoes wins"?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "As our new CEO, Eric [Schmidt] wanted to control costs and to lay down the law his first day in Dodge. And I also wasn't surprised that Larry and Sergey hadn't bothered telling him our marketing group wasn't like others he might have worked with, or, if they had, that he hadn't believed them.

We nodded our heads and interjected, where we could, muttering amens and hosannas when he let us. He seemed to hear some of it. When we let him know that Google t-shirts were our biggest expense, he smiled approvingly.

'That's fine keep doing that. If someone likes our product enough to want to wear our brand, we should do everything we can to make it possible. And it's great for staff morale to have everyone decked out in the company logo.' He would soon be signing off on expenditures for preshrunk cotton in the _seven- figure range_...

'Why don't we have Google t-shirts for women?' Sergey demanded of me after a female visitor left the office with our standard extra-large men's t-shirt. He was as upset as I'd ever seen him. When a woman in France chastised him about American companies and their enormously oversized t-shirts that no French woman would wear, he insisted that we address the problem once and for all. I ordered women's shirts - more than I thought we could ever give away - but we couldn't keep them in stock. I didn't understand why they were so popular, given our limited female staff, until my cousin thanked me for the one I had sent her and added, 'They're quite see-through. Was that intentional?'

-"I'm Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee 59", Douglas Edwards, p221-222

<comment><USER6> great anecdote! Also, see thru female t-shirts ftw ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I remember when I used to think like this. Now to me, a free t-shirt says the person wearing it doesn't really care about their appearance.

<comment><USER8> well, that's fair. I'd say I don't really care about my appearance. So?

<comment><USER7> I didn't say it was bad. Just a shift in perception from 'something of value' to 'something to send a social signal that maybe I don't want to send'.

<comment><USER9> Exactly, I remember one day throwing out (to good will) 20+ industry shirts, from events, vendors, prizes etc... because I reached an age where the social value wasn't there anymore, infact it became prohibiting towards being taken serious.

I look at the young guys I work with now getting all excited about vendor gear, smile, and reminisce about being the same age, but to me shirts are worthless (and as noted a stigma in some situations).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> One caveat: if you're going to make a t-shirt, do it right and spend the money to print it on decent material, i.e., soft, not scratchy, fitting decently, etc... (American Apparel's t-shirts are nice.) Any cheaply made t-shirts I get go straight to Goodwill.

<comment><USER11> American Apparel's sizes for women are truly horrible. Large ones fit an average sized 10 year old.

<comment><USER12> It is very strange. I love the AA women's cuts, but they are way smaller than most women's clothing sizes. It's really awkward to give them out because I have to tell people that they're going to need a bigger size.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't quite get the analogy. Yes, things have value to people even if it isn't paper money. But saying "t-shirts are currency" carries about the same weight as saying "hugs are currency". Title seems misleading.

</comment><comment><USER12> That's why we mail tshirts to customers who find bugs :)

<comment><USER14> we should talk, working on something to do this. would love to find out more about how you do this <http://swagmate.startupthreads.com>

<comment><USER12> nice. packing and shipping tshirts is a real drag, so I could see this being a really great service. signed up!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> When the companies are 'current', t-shirts can be used active in trade, much like valid currency in circulation in our economy.

When the companies shut down or get bought out, the t-shirts instead behave like old, defunct currency that become collectibles and memorabilia. They're items that evoke memories and eras gone by. I have a Conner Peripherals [1] shirt from 1994 that's in my drawer which someone in my family must have gotten from Finis; the t-shirt was made in celebration of a product launch that year [2]. The t-shirt design is godawful but it's endearing.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conner_Peripherals>

[2] I think Mozilla does this with their team shirts and shipping products, which like the OP says, definitely helps with team spirit.

</comment><comment><USER16> Protip: if you want me to actually wear your tshirt often, get American Apparel 50/50 or comparable quality/comfort shirts.

I just donated 30 tshirts I didn't want to Goodwill. Only one of them was a 50/50 and it had a particularly ugly design.

<comment><USER14> Agreed, 50/50 is the best you can get (in terms of feel). I'd also add that you should work on making a design thats more about the essence of what your company does, rather than just a logo

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> And yet companies still continue to ignore the potential added value from giving the option of women's sizes.

<comment><USER11> We have some advice on women's tshirts on the geekfeminism wiki - <AUTHOR> someone will find it useful!

<http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/T-shirts>

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Make sure you read the comment below by Mukund as well at: [http://bestengagingcommunities.com/2011/12/31/why-mentos- is-...](http://bestengagingcommunities.com/2011/12/31/why-mentos-is-now-legal- tender-in-india/), where he talked about how Mentos act as currency in India. It's a short blip and there's nothing about its geographical significance nor how widespread the effect is. But it's still some post that provides an interesting look at other cultures and quite a fun read.

<comment><USER19> The same thing happenend in Argentina a few years ago. Not enough coins were coined, and since the bus used a machine that only took coins, thye were in high demand (there was even a point where you could sell coins for up to 120% of their nominal worth). It was obnoxiously common at teh time for drugstores to give you candy instead of change in coins, simply because they didn't have enough of them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I remember last year at SXSW, I was taking my box of tshirts back to the hotel so I could sort through and organize them. I put the box down for a second to give my friend a shirt. A mass of people flocked around me and within 20 minutes my box of 200 shirts was gone. People didnt even have a clear idea of that the shirts were for, but it had a heart on it so that was cool enough.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'll heartily agree. New Relic got my business based on e free T-shirt, and I wouldn't have considered it without some enticement to try.

It's the testament that you were there or you did something that's the reward, over just cash.

</comment><comment><USER21> At a tech company where I worked tech support ages ago, it was amazing how happy otherwise furious customers got when we offered them a t-shirt...

</comment><comment><USER22> The insight here is that everybody takes t-shirts as alternative payment method for situations where paying real money would be a social faux-pas. T-shirts are more like letters of gratitude.

You can give your friends funny t-shirts to thank them helping you move, but you can't give them $20 instead without insulting them by implying that their time is worth so little.

</comment><comment><USER23> Confession time:

The first and only software T-shirt swag I ever received permanently traumatised me and set the internet back 10 years.

I downloaded Internet Explorer 3 on launch day and received a "Midnight Madness" T-shirt for my efforts.

I'm really sorry. I was young and didn't know any better. Every day I boot up my Ubuntu laptop and try to make amends.

</comment><comment><USER24> My problem with a T-Shirt is that I will never wear it.

Yet at the same time, I can't think of anything quite as universal to use for showing an achievement or membership.

I guess if worse comes to worse I can enchant it.[0]

[0]: <http://nethackwiki.com/wiki/shirt>

<comment><USER25> A jacket ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26>
      ...A t-shirt says something. It's visible. You can show it off. It's an
      invisible handshake among those who know what the t-shirt symbolizes. ...

Doesn't that actually make T-shirts the opposite of currency? The point of money is that it's all the same.

</comment><comment><USER27> That most give-away T's do not have pockets makes them more or less useless to me.

I've become so used to wearing pocket T's (white or charcoal grey) pretty much every day that any T-shirt without a pocket now feels incomplete.

<comment><USER3> Do you use the pocket?

<comment><USER27> Yes. Are there people with a preference for pocket Ts who don't use the pocket?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> The main reason I actually completed the Stripe CTF was for the t-shirt.

</comment><comment><USER29> Even Cheaper than Indians ! ;)</comment>


Untangling an Accounting Tool and an Ancient Incan Mystery - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/03/world/americas/untangling-an-accounting-tool-and-an-ancient-incan-mystery.html <comment><USER2> Unless it's been cleaned up significantly, I don't really like the database that Urton has (as of ~2-3 years ago). It is a great resource, but I'd have to spend a few weeks trying to chew out the inconsistencies if I were to be able to use it in a way that I would be comfortable analyzing. Much of the text data is outright messy, which I guess is an artifact of hand-entry. Imagery alongside the data would be nice. Aside from that, the biggest thing that could probably be done to improve the data (at least to make it easier to process) is to develop one or more serialized string forms for cords instead of having solely a related table with individual knots.

<comment><USER3> I spent quite a bit of time on the Urton database in 2006. Would need to dig out the pre/post processing Perl scripts and see a more recent version of the database.

An area that would also be ripe for computational analysis is the texts from Spanish archives that are known to have been sourced from khipu readings. "Pärssinen, Martti & Kiviharju, Jukka. Textos Andinos. Corpus de textos khipu incaicos y coloniales. Tomo I & II" would be a good starting point.

<comment><USER2> Known or hypothesized?</comment></comment></comment>


Advice to future software engineers - <AUTHOR> http://indecorous.com/future/

<comment><USER2> I would add that software engineering is not the same as programming. You don't need to be a software engineer to write code but if you want to work on any large scale project you need software engineering skills that have little to do with programming.</comment>


I'm Trying to Run for President, but the Democrats Won't Let Me - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/equal-citizens/i-m-trying-to-run-for-president-but-the-democrats-won-t-let-me-7860eac918f8 <comment><USER2> I like Larry Lessig but this is being more than a bit dissembling. He is quoted as saying he would pass one law and then quit.[1] And there are two huge problems with that, first Presidents in the US don't "pass laws" they sign (or veto) the laws that _Congress_ passes. And generally if you're going to invest time and effort at becoming president and your just focussed on getting on law passed, how can we imagine you will do any of the other things you have to do as President (like stare down Vladimir Putin, or open up relations with Cuba)?

If Larry really wanted to change the world he would not be making some non- serious PR campaign like attempt at running, he would actually try to make change. And to do that he needs 51 Senators and probably 300 representatives on his side. And to do _that_ he either has to convince incumbents to sign on to his plan or help get people elected who believe in what he is trying to do. And yes that is a MUCH harder road than just throwing up a few ads and claiming you want to be elected to the highest office of the land, but it is the difference between a _mission_ and a _stunt_. He is very much in stunt category here and so the rank and file democrats don't take him seriously.

Donald Trump, for all is belligerence, has shown that you can get on to the political stage even when your nominal party hates you. The difference is that Trump can influence millions of people.

So if Lessig continues to out raise other members of the party, and can influence his followers to get his message out, and convert more to that way of thinking. Sure, he will get on stage. But I do not believe for a second that he believes "running for President of the US" is as simple or as straight forward as running for student body president. It has never been so and will never be so. I think Larry knows this, but I could be wrong.

[1] [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_ch...](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2015/08/lawrence_lessig_presidential_campaign_donate_before_labor_day_for_citizen.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> That's Democracy for you!</comment>


Profits are too high – America needs a giant dose of competition - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21695385-profits-are-too-high-america-needs-giant-dose-competition-too-much-good-thing <comment><USER2> Really don't see a sensible margin that can be given back to passengers. If you make 2-3$ per seat sold, then you already double the profit by selling a coke to passengers.</comment>


Script to get emails when someone unfollows you on twitter - <AUTHOR> http://gist.github.com/222182

<comment><USER2> It's not nice to care about people unfollowing you. Twitter is used by many as a stream of news, so it's a natural process that my interests shifts over time I want to unfollow people twitting about stuff that are no longer pertinent to what I'm doing right now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair enough - but "nice" has nothing to do with it. If you're using Twitter, as many are, to get a message out, it's useful to know who no longer thinks your message is interesting, especially if you can pair it with a cause (a recent tweet that may have been offensive or a string of self-centered tweets, e.g.).

Like I said, I was just tinkering around and thought I'd share something I made that might be useful to someone.

<comment><USER3> " ... or a string of self-centered tweets,"

Isn't that sort of the essence of Twitter?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Don't like these kind of scripts. They are like "Yyz read your away message" or even worse "Xyz closed your message window" in ICQ and other messangers.

But nice code.

<comment><USER5> _or even worse "Xyz closed your message window" in ICQ and other messangers._

Agreed about that, I've had (ex) coworkers give me grief about that, as if closing their message window was some form of devaluing their comments... when in reality I was just trying to make MY environment more manageable for getting my work done, unbelievable. I wish IMs wouldn't include such pointless notifications, I'm not even sure there is really any value to 'X is typing a response'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It'd be a little easier to do this by requesting followers/ids ([http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Twitter-REST-API- Method%3A-follow...](http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Twitter-REST-API- Method%3A-followers%C2%A0ids) ) if you have over 100 followers. That'll give you 5,000 id's at a shot and then you can just do a simple diff of id's.

Yes, you'd have to then request their profile info so {1:6, other:0.5*dozen}.

</comment><comment><USER7> You can get an rss feed of unfollowers: <http://rssfriends.com/only/unfollowers/yourusernamehere> (eg <http://rssfriends.com/only/unfollowers/oliverg>) -- it's an undocumented url: and at first, setup this site to track your username by entering it on the homepage

</comment><comment><USER8> <http://useqwitter.com/>

Same idea, with zero maintenance

<comment><USER9> It stopped working for me months ago. I don't know why.

<comment><USER10> maybe no one's stopped following you, you popular fellow, you!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great, if enough people use this we'll see the emergence of _unfollow spam_.

</comment><comment><USER12> Is there anything like this for facebook? I'd kill for that:)

</comment><comment><USER13> If you're really concerned about people unfollowing you on Twitter, you're probably using it wrong.

</comment><comment><USER14> Am I the only one who smirked when he saw Ruby code for Twitter? Sorry, just fits a stereotype ;)

<comment><USER15> What else would you write it in (besides python)?

<comment><USER14> I just meant that the Ruby and Twitter in the same sentence provoke certain stereotypical images in my head.

What would I write this in? I wouldn't write this.

Still, well done to the guy. It's good code.

<comment><AUTHOR> ... and the stereotype probably fits :)

I was just playing around with the API and thought I'd do this a quick little exercise. Once it worked, I thought I'd share. Thanks for the kind words.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A Cautionary Tale from the Startup World - <AUTHOR> http://randfishkin.com/blog/60/cautionary-tale-startup-world <comment><USER2> "The minute you start believing that you're something special – that you're the smartest, most talented guy in every room – is the minute things start to fall apart."

So true. Paranoia and humility are your closest friends.

<comment><USER3> Andy Grove had a point with the title of his book, Only The Paranoid Survive. That's what I admire most about Bill Gates, from the 1970s till maybe 2000 he managed to remain paranoid. (I say this as a compliment and something that I hope to emulate.) Most people with his level of success would become smug and over-confident. Like his successor, for instance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If anyone knows the company he wrote about I'd be curious to know (whether it was the author's intention or not).

<comment><USER5> the article is interesting but without context it's kind of pointless. how do we know he is not making this up?

the company had supposedly revenue of 150mil with net loses of around 100mil. my guess is that this was some kind of online shop with very tiny profit margins.

EDIT: who would be buying an online shop? the only company I know of is Amazon, could this company in the article be <http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/30/woot-amazon/> ?

<comment><USER6> Pretty sure it's Woot. Coincidences?

1\. See if you can find anything on the VCs who backed Woot. There's nothing on Crunchbase and nothing on Google. No-one is trumpeting it as a success, or even mentioning it in their (previous) portfolios.

2\. Purchase price was reportedly $110m in cash - exact same number as in this post.

3\. Post says firm was founded by close friends. He seems to live in Seattle, which is where Woot is/was based.

4\. Current CEO of Woot, and presumably CEO at the time, has protected his tweets.

<comment><USER7> Woot is based in Dallas, TX

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This all sounds very familiar. Especially the bit about the conservative co- founder. When the hype is loudest, the voice of reason gets pushed to the side... and he who makes the biggest promises gets the biggest reward.

</comment><comment><USER9> I think the lesson here is simpler: the company hit product-market fit, and assumed this would be the case forever. This wasn't true, of course. The founders hadn't optimized for this problem, they disagreed on what to do next, success got to their heads, and everything spiraled out of control.

It's always harder to follow-up on a success, especially a huge one, like what the company in this story had.

</comment><comment><USER10> The only ones I can think of that ended up like this way have some notable differences - for example, managed to actually go public first, etc.

</comment><comment><USER11> >Curiously, the CEO hired an exceptionally attractive young woman to be his executive assistant, despite questionable qualifications....

\-- Where have I heard this story before?

<comment><USER12> The whole story seems like a big cliche.</comment></comment>


ButterflyLabs Placed Under Temporary Receivership - <AUTHOR> http://butterflylabs.com/?v=temporaryreceivership

<comment><AUTHOR> Image posted on butterflylabs.com: [http://i.imgur.com/QVEc9a3.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/QVEc9a3.jpg)</comment>


Show HN: FIND – an indoor positioning system for smartphones and laptops - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/schollz/find <comment><USER2> Unfortunately the close link on the popup doesn't work and I can't click any link or button, with the exception of the main menu at the top of the page. The menu also hides the top of the popup unless I scroll to the very top of the page. Opera Android.

I'll check the GitHub repository.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for letting me know. I removed the popup. I'll check out what happens with Opera.

Yeah, in the meantime you can find most info on the Github Readme and more detailed info at [http://internalpositioning.com/guide/](http://internalpositioning.com/guide/).

<comment><USER2> I confirm that it works now. Thank you.</comment></comment></comment>


The Highest Form of Flattery - <AUTHOR> http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/08/07/the-highest-form-of-flattery-prettejohn/ <comment><USER2> A plateau is...</comment>


Show HN: Lazyboi – the laziest possible way to send raw HTTP POST data - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ctsrc/lazyboi <comment><AUTHOR> lazyboi is a bash script which makes it fast and easy to send raw HTTP POST requests to servers, for example to send some JSON to an API end-point that you are developing on your machine, or to send some test-data to an API that you are integrating with. Using curl for this purpose from the commandline can be cumbersome if you have multiple headers that need to be specified, or if you are submitting complex JSON data. Doubly so when you need to make changes to the request headers and the data. Editing long commandline invocations; no bueno. Several great tools exist for interacting with HTTP APIs. But sometimes those tools are overkill and you just want to submit some headers and data, and to tweak those headers and data a little bit all in one place in raw form. That is what lazyboi lets you do – it embeds a raw HTTP request that you can easily edit with your favorite source code editor, and which you then submit to the server by running the script. Edit and run. Edit and run. The README shows an example embedded HTTP request and contains instructions on how to use the script and how to install it.</comment>


Sphere in Mirrored Spheroid - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.ams.org/visualinsight/2015/04/15/sphere-in-mirrored-spheroid/

<comment><USER2> I tried to do the same thing in Blender a few months ago. The best I've got was [http://i.imgur.com/8QmZOna.png](http://i.imgur.com/8QmZOna.png) .

Maybe I'm not so good with Blender :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can someone fire the author of this work and explain what I'm looking at in English?

<comment><USER4> It's a spherical version of an infinity mirror. You're seeing the reflections of reflections of that little white ball off to the right.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_mirror](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_mirror)</comment></comment>


Motorola Skip: Password security without the hassle (key restrictions apply) - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/08/motorola-skip-password-security-without-the-hassle-key-restrictions-apply/

<comment><AUTHOR> Motorola blog post about this: [http://motorola- blog.blogspot.co.at/2013/08/hello-skip-goodb...](http://motorola- blog.blogspot.co.at/2013/08/hello-skip-goodbye-pin-introducing.html)</comment>


Gwern refuses to withdraw his claims that "Satoshi is probably Craig Wright" - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/bdypn6/this_is_old_but_gold_gwern_branwen_coauthors_an/elj6xn9/ <comment><AUTHOR> This is the article in question, co-authored by Gwern and published on Wired in August 2015:

"Bitcoin's creator Satoshi Nakamoto is probably this unknown Australian genius"

[https://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi- nakam...](https://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is- probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/)

This was one of the first and strongest "evidence" supporting Craig's claims, published by a well-known magazine and a reputable researcher. I've personally talked with several people who were convinced of the authenticity of Craig's claims using this publication as one of their primary justifications.

The linked thread has a long discussion between Greg Maxwell (/u/nullc) and Gwern (/u/gwern), where Greg calls him out and repeatedly asks him to retract his previous claims; Gwern acknowledges that he was deceived, but refuses to make an official retraction.

<comment><USER2> That Wired article currently has an "Update 12/14/2015" vague small note added at the very end, suggesting some doubt. That note would be better at the beginning of the article, than the end, IMHO.

If a real retraction is warranted (I don't know whether it is), then Wired should do it, with or without the original writers.</comment></comment>